On 19/08/2025 09:46, Mike Looijmans wrote:
>>> +
>>> +properties:
>>> + compatible:
>>> + enum:
>>> + - ti,tmds181
>>> + - ti,sn65dp159
>> The driver contains:
>> + { .compatible = "ti,tmds181", },
>> + { .compatible = "ti,sn65dp159", },
>> + {}
>> so why is a fallback compatible not suitable here?
>
> I don't understand the question. The two are slightly different chips,
Your driver says they are compatible. No one said the same, but compatible.
> so it makes sense to describe that in the DT.
Compatible devices should use fallback. There is plenty of examples (90%
of all binding files?) including example-schema describing this.
>
Best regards,
Krzysztof
